About your Search

Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
not get his miranda rights. >> among of group of republicans calling for the boston bombing suspect to be considered an enemy combatant. that means he would not have the same constitutional protection as a regular citizen, with regard to what he says as the investigation moves forward. will this happen? california congressman, a senior member of the intelligence committee. congressman, always good to see you. i know that you disagree with the congressman and think that the suspect is in custody. is entitled to his miranda rights. why? >> well, i think the administration is handling it exactly correct. there is a public safety exception under the miranda allowing law enforcement to interview him, making sure there are no other bombs, threats, perpetrators still out there giving the law enforcement flexibility to do the that prior to miranda and i think the court will interpret it broadly and give them the time they need to make sure that the public is safe. after that, he will have to be mirandized, doesn't mean the end of cooperation, but no basis yet to conclude they should be trea
okayed the suspension of the suspect's miranda rights. is that a temporary suspension? >> reporter: yes, by law it is. it's called the public safety exception to the miranda rule. normally you have to tell someone they have a right to remain silent and if you don't, then you can't use anything they tell you in court. so that's why the miranda warning is given. but there is an exception. you don't have to do it if there's a possible threat to public safety. and here obviously there's a concern about whether there are potential accomplices. investigators say they haven't found any. or other explosives. they say they haven't found any of those either but that's what they want to ask him. and this exception probably begins to expire the moment you invoke it so it's probably no good for more than a day or two but nonetheless they can do that. afterwards they'll have to give him his miranda warning and say whether he'll continue to answer questions. the justice department says even in very serious cases like this, most people in custody do continue to talk. >> pete, who's going to be interrog
incriminating evidence against him, there will be a necessity to advise him of his miranda warnings. they are probably discussing the timing, the first priority to protect the public. but they don't want to jeopardize their case. but there is no much evidence, my guess that will be a lesser consideration in their deliberations. >> you are right. the public safety exemption-- the interrogation has to be limited and focused. but that's not the case if he were to be declared an enemy combatant. now senator lindsay graham says he should be declared an enemy combatant so a thorough interrogation, a lengthy one without limits could be undertaken. would you agree with that? >> i know, i think it's hard to judge from a distance, without greater information. so, no, i wouldn't be calling to treat him as an enemy combatant without more information. the consequence is, you treat him like an enemy combatant, you may have a longer interview that may or may not give you better information than if you mirandize him. but it poses a real problem, in terms of prosecutes him and bringing him to judge.
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3